Appeal No. 2003-0230
Application No. 09/624,025
As we have reversed the rejection of claim 1, we likewise
reverse this rejection for the reasons noted above.
V. The rejection of Claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as
being unpatentable over Gardner in view of Arnold and Sheng
as applied to claim 15, further in view of Peidous.
As we have reversed the rejection of claim 1, we likewise
reverse this rejection for the reasons noted above.
Summary of Decision
The rejection of Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8-10, 12, and 14 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Gardner in view of
Arnold and Sheng is reversed.
The rejection of Claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Gardner in view of Arnold and Sheng, as applied
to claims 1 and 9, further in view of Wu is reversed.
The rejection of Claims 3, 11, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. §103(a)
as being unpatentable over Gardner in view of Arnold and Sheng as
applied to claims 1 and 9, further in view of Peidous is reversed.
The rejection of Claims 15, 16, 18, and 20 under 35 U.S.C.
§103(a) as being unpatentable over Gardner in view of Arnold,
Sheng, and Wu is reversed. The rejection of Claim 17 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Gardner in view of
Arnold and Sheng as applied to claim 15, further in view of
Peidous is reversed.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007